On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Rasika Perera wrote:
> Hi Kalai and All,
>
> As Sumedha mentioned you can refer, OAuth Protected MQTT extension in [1]
> for the IoT Server as well.
>
> If I understand you correctly, you are going to use DAS's carbon.xml
> values as the
Hi all,
As a component of my project (discussed in the mail thread "*Metadata model
for supporting edge nodes in an IoT deployment*") it is required to create
an API that would return the structure of a Device Organization connected
to the IoT Server.
When being enrolled, the agents of each
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Fazlan Nazeem wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> Are we planning to change the ownership of the generated application token
> owner as well? i.e AUTHZ_USER of the token and USERNAME of Oauth App in
> the DB tables. Otherwise, for analytics, these changes
Hi Sam,
Are we planning to change the ownership of the generated application token
owner as well? i.e AUTHZ_USER of the token and USERNAME of Oauth App in
the DB tables. Otherwise, for analytics, these changes wouldn't be
reflected right?
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Prasanna Dangalla
Hi Sam,
+1 to have the new scope app_manage.
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 7:59 AM Sam Sivayogam wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Malintha Amarasinghe
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Sam,
>>
>> This overall looks good to me. Added few inline comments.
>>
>> On Sun, Dec
On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Malintha Amarasinghe
wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> This overall looks good to me. Added few inline comments.
>
> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 6:26 AM, Sam Sivayogam wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> As discussed in mail thread[1] we had a
Hi Sam/Malintha,
+1 to both suggestions made by Malintha.
On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Malintha Amarasinghe
wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> This overall looks good to me. Added few inline comments.
>
> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 6:26 AM, Sam Sivayogam wrote:
>
>>
>>